top | item 35872952

(no title)

kaanski | 2 years ago

> The King or Queen functionally has zero power over much of anything - their role is pretty much entirely ceremonial in purpose (they can theoretically choose to not sign laws, but this would just result in them getting sidestepped).

This is the same in the UK I’m not sure I see the stark difference. The Monarch doesn’t really have power over parliament.

discuss

order

hnhg|2 years ago

It is actually rather opaque in the UK. It took a lot of work to find out the following, which not be the full of extent of what goes on: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vette...

kaanski|2 years ago

So the Queen read bills and gave her opinion on them, which is public record, before they were debated? And that constitutes political power?

It also states that this is a purely formal part of the parliamentary process and she never refused something being debated, even if she did parliament could override it.

I’d argue that if David Beckham tweeted his annoyance at a bill being passed it would have more influence. Not to mention the hundreds of lobby groups that get their way.

I think people forget that the relationship between Monarch and people in Britain has always been different to the rest of Europe. No Magna Carta or equivalent document was signed anywhere else in Europe in the 1200s. It took the famously rebellious France 150 years to abolish their monarch after the English did.

Personally I don’t mind the monarchy, if they replace it then fine, but I want it replaced with something decent. I definitely don’t want to see a US style presidential republic set up here, with executive orders, etc.

I’ve said this before in another thread but growing up as a not very well off ethnic minority the Queen seemed to care more about me than anyone in parliament. The monarch in the UK shows more civil devotion and service than any politician.